2011 QCCA 1456, 2011 QCCA 1456

Droit de la famille — 112309 2011 QCCA 1456 COURT OF APPEAL CANADA PROVINCE OF QUEBEC REGISTRY OF MONTREAL No: 500-09-021815-113 ( 500-12-305741-104 ) MINUTES OF THE HEARING DATE: August 1, 2011 CORAM: THE HONOURABLE JACQUES DUFRESNE, J.A. NICOLE DUVAL HESLER, J.A. RICHARD WAGNER, J.A. APPELLANT ATTORNEY W... G... Mtre Allan Adel ARCHAMBAULT ADEL TRUDEL RESPONDENT ATTORNEYS C... C... Mtre Andrew H, Heft Mtre Catherine Eustache ATTORNEY

Amended Motion for Dismissal of the Appeal from a judgment rendered on June 20, 2011 by the Honourable Justice Mark G. Peacock of the Superior Court, District of Montreal. Motion for Leave to Appeal «de bene esse». Clerk: Robert Osadchuck Courtroom: Pierre-Basile-Mignault HEARING Joint hearing of the motions in the following files: 500-09-021443-114, 500-09-021815-113 et 500-09-021877-113. 10 h 14 Beginning of the hearing. 10 h 14 Remarks by the Court. 10 h 16 Submission by Mtre Heft. Mtre Heft renounces to plead the irregularity of the appeal.

The Motion for Leave to Appeal "De Bene Esse" becomes without any object. 10 h 40 Submission by Mtre Derstenfeld. 10 h 44 Submission by Mtre Adel. 11 h 04 Recess 11 h 27 Resumption of the hearing. 11 h 27 Reply by Mtre Heft. 11 h 28 Recess. 11 h 34 Resumption of the hearing. 11 h 34 By the Court: judgment (see next page). 12 h 10 Representations by Mtre Adel re: evidence excluded by the trial judge. Mte Adel is asking not to duplicate, in his own appeal, the evidence already produced by Mtre Heft in the file of the first appeal.

That does not deprive Mtre Heft of his right to argue that it should not be considered for a given purpose. 12 h 50 The Court Gives act to the parties of their Agreement as to the conduct of proceedings. Robert Osadchuck Clerk BY THE COURT

JUDGMENT [ 1 ] Even were Appellant right in her submissions on the law, it is not appropriate to grant her Motion to Dismiss the Appeal by Respondent of the judgment finding him guilty of contempt of Court, since part of the circumstances relevant to that finding are also relevant in the appeal of the judgment disallowing Appellant's Motion to Contest a Negative Declaration by the garnishees in her proceedings to execute the Interim Order in her favour. [ 2 ] What one judge considered a deception orchestrated between Respondent and his son, another seemingly considered a genuine, binding agreement. [ 3 ] Therefore, it is appropriate to dismiss the Motion to Dismiss the Appeal, costs to follow, and exceptionally to join all three appeals for hearing. [ 4 ] As to security for costs, Respondent claims to have no assets of any kind and it would not be appropriate to grant any in the circumstances.

FOR THESES REASONS, THE COURT: [ 5 ] DISMISSES the Amended Motion to dismiss the Appeal, costs to follow; [ 6 ] JOINS the three appeals (500-09-021443-114, 500-09-021815-113 and 500-09-021877-113) for a three hours hearing on January 19, 2012, in room Pierre-Basile-Mignault at 9 h 30; [ 7 ] GIVES ACT to the parties of their Amended Agreement as to the Conduct of Proceedings and Timetable signed on August 1, 2011 and ORDERS the parties to conform therewith. JACQUES DUFRESNE, J.A. NICOLE DUVAL HESLER, J.A. RICHARD WAGNER, J.A.